gaming with E6300 and E6600

[yannis76]

Hi,

I recently upgraded from a 4200 to E6300 and did a very mild but succesful oc from 7x266(1875) to 7x300(2100). The main reason I did get the 6300 was that I didnt have the money for the 6600. However I really wonder whether there is any noticable difference between the 2 CPUs. I mainly play at 1280x1024 full details and all the games I tried play great at stock speed. Company of heroes and GRAW play great, same as 4200+. Overclocking the E6300 was succesful but I didnt notice any advantage...So is it worth the faster cpu?

 

[killer_uk]

Stick with what you have. CPUs tend to make little difference to the performance of games when you add on the details and higher resolutions.(At the moment anyway)

 

[yannis76]

Aren't there any application or games that are CPU intensive? Office is not and I donty think that Photoshop will show any big improvement either. Anything else?

 

[silversurfer]

Photoshop should show a big difference and office can be cpu intensive if you have a million name 3d database or some such, its just that most people dont not at home.

Some games benefit from dual core but not many, aandtech.com did a good review on this I think. Age of empires (RTS) and championship manager benefit greatly due to a lot of AI.
Your average online FPS relys on the gfx mostly, you're the AI but you could probably do 63 bots on your BF2 server with this chip if you wanted now.

Playing at a high res means its all about the gfx cpu, if you were at 800x600 you'd double your fps from 100 to 200 but if you were able to notice that though you should apply to be a jet pilot because its still not a usefull increase to most

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Ones I use that are CPU intensive are video encoding. Canopus, CCE, TMPGenc, Virtual Dub etc. I went from an Athlon XP 3200 to an E6300. There is a really big difference. Eg DVD quality MPEG2 encoding used to chug along at around 8 fps in Canopus (depending on quality settings etc). With the E6300 at a mild overclock it was doing the same at around 24 fps. Its now overclocked a fair bit more but haven't tried doing the same yet.

The games I have tried are definately smoother. How much of that is down to the CPU, and how much is down to the new video card (6800 128mb vs 7600GT 256mb) I don't know.

I made a jump from a fairly dated processor though. If you're going from a recent processor like an X2 4200+ to an E6300 I doubt you would see any difference except in benchmarks and some CPU intensive programs. The typical game probably wouldn't benefit much.

 

[Jabbs]

Get it clocked 2.6 or above and you have better than a fx 62, not bad for a £130 cpu

 

[probedb]

I can't wait....I'm going from an A64 3000+ / X800 Pro to an E6300 / X1900XT Will leave it to run as standard whilst I get it setup then let the overclocking games begin!

Unfortunately I can't do any benchmark comparisons because PCmk2005 won't run and 3dmark2005 crashes!

 

[yannis76]

My point is that unless one has a super SLI setup, one doesn't need a 6600 or 6700 CPU. I really cant find any reason to overclock my CPU right now.
I use my PC for Office, Internet, ocasionally some video encoding (Divx-->DVD) and a lot of gaming at 1280x1024. In these applications I mention above, will I see any benefit by overcloking the 6300?